Psychic didn’t see trademark loss coming

Description

Abstract: In 1995, a popular psychic and astrologer entered into a contract for the production and distribution of materials featuring his services. Under the agreement, he granted the company the right to use his name as a trademark. In 2006, a legal dispute arose when he ceased providing services, and the company ceased to pay him. A jury found that he had violated the agreement. After he was later enjoined from using his name as a trademark, he appealed. This article explains why the subtleties of contract language resulted in the rejection of his claim. Citation: Mercado-Salinas v. Bart Enterprises Int’l, Ltd., No. 10–2359, Dec. 20, 2011 (1st Cir.)